Sabah’s Sovereignty Betrayed: PDA 1974 is Illegal, Unconstitutional and Must Go

BY Daniel John Jambun
President
Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)

KOTA KINABALU: The Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo) condemns in the strongest terms the continued enforcement of the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA) — a law unilaterally imposed by Kuala Lumpur that stripped Sabah of its sovereign rights over oil and gas.

This Act, passed 11 years after the formation of Malaysia, is nothing less than a legalised act of expropriation. It violated the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63), the Federal Constitution, and Sabah’s Oil Mining Ordinance 1958. The PDA was designed not to promote unity, but to plunder Sabah’s wealth and centralise power under Petronas and Putrajaya.

MA63 vs PDA: Truth vs Fraud

MA63: The founding covenant of Malaysia, recognised by the international community, guaranteed Sabah autonomy over natural resources. It was the condition for Sabah’s entry into the federation.

PDA 1974: A unilateral Act of Parliament in Kuala Lumpur that confiscated Sabah’s petroleum resources without the people’s consent. It overrides MA63 in breach of both domestic and international law.

The PDA was never endorsed by the Sabah Legislative Assembly nor approved by the people of Sabah. It is therefore constitutionally invalid and void ab initio.

Why PDA is a Betrayal

1. Disregards Sabah’s Sovereignty: It tore up the safeguards of MA63 and the Federal Constitution.
2. Economic Robbery: Sabah receives a token 5% royalty while Petronas and Putrajaya reap billions.
3. Destroys Federalism: By concentrating power in the federal executive, it hollowed out Malaysia’s promise of equal partnership.
4. Sows Division: Instead of unity, the PDA has fuelled anger, inequality, and disenfranchisement across Borneo.

Answering Ku Li’s Nostalgia

Former Finance Minister Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah claims the PDA “united the nation” against foreign companies. The truth is otherwise:

Before 1974, Sabah already had legal jurisdiction over its oil and gas under the Oil Mining Ordinance 1958.

The PDA did not “free” Sabah’s resources from foreign hands — it transferred control from Shell to Petronas and Putrajaya, with Sabah reduced to a beggar in its own land.

Unity cannot be built on theft. The PDA did not unite the nation; it divided it — enriching the centre while impoverishing Sabah and Sarawak.

If anything threatens Malaysia’s unity today, it is the refusal to honour MA63, not Sabah’s demand for justice.

A Call for Justice and Restoration

BoPiMaFo demands:

1. Recognition of MA63 supremacy over all subsequent legislation, including the PDA.
2. Immediate repeal or amendment of the PDA to restore Sabah’s ownership and control of its resources.
3. Restitution of lost revenues — billions siphoned away from Sabah must be accounted for and repaid.
4. Empowerment of Sabah-based institutions to regulate and manage oil and gas for the benefit of the people.

Conclusion

The PDA is not a symbol of national unity — it is a symbol of colonial-style exploitation by Kuala Lumpur. Sabah’s patience has run out. We will no longer tolerate being robbed in the name of “unity.”

The future of Malaysia depends on justice: honour MA63, restore Sabah’s rights, and let resource wealth serve Sabahans first — not Putrajaya.